Talk:Names Database

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Classmates.com#Controversial business practices and legal issues|controversial business practices and legal issues]] The anchor (#Controversial business practices and legal issues) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Fraud

Someone should create a fraud section for this entry. My credit card has been charged several times for 12.00 over the years by them, and I've had to dispute and cancel it twice over this. I've never purchased a thing or signed up for this "service". I'd never even heard of it until they billed me. This is apparently very common. Google "UOL the names database fraud" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.227.196.207 (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the Names Database just an e-mail address harvesting scheme for the purposes of spamming? Shouldn't the WP writeup mention this?

That's what I think it is too. 70.95.43.1 08:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it almost certainly is. I added lots of citations to that effect.

I'm just wondering, two people I know from my grade in my school (which is small) are on the names database. And they haven't had anything to do with it. I've googled their names with the school and have returned negligible results. How did their names get on? I wonder how Names Database works in that sense.--Pyg 05:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard they used the database of another site, like Reunion or Class Mates. I wondered where the "50 mil" reported names info comes from. On the site it gives that they have 24.5 mil members. --Trickse 20:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with all of your comments and I must question the validity of that site. I decided to do a search of myself there and just about everything in there about me is wrong. I honestly don't care about it however, as I doubt it is anything to be taken seriously. They probably just accumulate email addresses and sell the lists to other companies. Stovetopcookies 01:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

This article just attacks Names Database, and is not neutral, and has many unsubstantiated 'facts'

This is definitly a e-mail harvesting machine, that wants to get 4 new (valid) adresses to give you access to a massage from a known friend. The problem is - there is no massage, but your 4 colleagues get an invitation that seems to be sent by yourself! IMHO it is important that people can find this info on wikipedia

If you want to call it an "e-mail harvesting scheme", then you need to provide a reference to support this view on the subject. Then, counter-claims would be provided as well (with their references). This is how we should report on controversial subjects. Hugo Dufort 21:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A great way to show where Wikipedia's "provide references" fails - how am I to prove that starting a week after some idoot friend of mine entered my data on there, my main email address, which for 4 years of heavy (but discriminating) use started receiving substantial amounts of spam? I had not had to use any anti-spam software up to 2006, and got maybe 2 a year. Now I get two a day. No I cannot prove the causality. They are laughing all the way to the bank. MadMaxDog 11:37, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So why not write an article about it, put it up on a free webhost, and use that as the reference? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stovetopcookies (talk • contribs) 01:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I do not know if this is vandalism or not, but I feel that it should be removed: "The Link above does not work, even when you try to remove your information, such as credit card details etc, and close your account no confirmation email is sent and you can still log in. Also if you try to contact them via email, you get no response. This is a scam site that automatically renews your membershp without permission and will not allow you to cancel."WingedSkiCap (talk) 02:08, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All Cleaned Up

...I think I worked for a while and think I have the article cleaned up. If you see any errors or dont agree with any of my decisions, please let me know here. Thanks --Wdflake 00:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Names Database. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://namesdatabase.com/cgi-bin/signup

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Names Database. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]